Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already covering the safety profile, the description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: cursor-based pagination and the fact that the feed includes counterparties, price, marketplace, and transaction hash. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but the added pagination detail goes past what the annotations provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads purpose, then filtering, then tool routing, which is a sensible order. The per-parameter restatement of slug and limit is somewhat redundant given full schema coverage, but the prose stays short and each block is purposeful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 12-param cursor-feed tool with an output schema (so return fields needn't be explained), the description covers purpose, filtering, pagination, and sibling routing. It leaves minor gaps around pagination termination and the items-only params, but nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates slug (Required) and limit (1-100, default 20), which the schema already documents, and gives an event_types example rather than new semantics. It does not clarify the 'Items endpoint only' params that are present in this schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns a cursor-paginated feed of marketplace events for a collection') and enumerates the event types it covers. It explicitly contrasts with its sibling by naming opensea_activity for marketplace-wide activity, so the agent can distinguish collection-scoped from marketplace-wide feeds without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Names the alternative tool (opensea_activity) and the distinguishing condition (marketplace-wide vs collection-scoped), and gives a concrete filtering example (`event_types=SALE`). It lacks explicit when-not guidance, but the routing context is clear and actionable.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.